Simplify AssertJ assertions related to Iterable

[kthoms]

What problem are you trying to solve?

Resolve Sonar issues of type java:S5838

What precondition(s) should be checked before applying this recipe?

AssertJ library is present

Describe the situation before applying the recipe

class A {
    void foo(Iterable bar) {
        assertThat(bar).hasSize(0);
    }
}

Describe the situation after applying the recipe

class A {
    void foo(Iterable bar) {
        assertThat(bar).isEmpty();
    }
}

Have you considered any alternatives or workarounds?

Any additional context

There might be other situations for AbstractIterableAssert or ListAssert that could be changed, too.

The issue can be reproduced by adding to org.openrewrite.java.testing.assertj.AssertJBestPracticesTest.SonarDedicatedAssertions#replacements:

arguments("java.lang.Iterable", "assertThat(x).hasSize(0)", "assertThat(x).isEmpty()"),

Are you interested in contributing this recipe to OpenRewrite?

In general, yes, but too busy ATM.

[timtebeek]

Thanks! Proposed here:

• Replace hasSize(0) check with isEmpty() in AssertJIterableRules PicnicSupermarket/error-prone-support#1871

[timtebeek]

So there already is a matching recipe, but somehow it's not matching here ; not sure what's going on there yet. 🤔